These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of mineral trioxide aggregate and diluted formocresol in pulpotomized human primary molars: 42-month follow-up and survival analysis.
    Author: Mettlach SE, Zealand CM, Botero TM, Boynton JR, Majewski RF, Hu JC.
    Journal: Pediatr Dent; 2013; 35(3):E87-94. PubMed ID: 23756301.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the clinical and radiographic outcomes of diluted formocresol (DFC) compared to gray mineral trioxide aggregate (GMTA) pulpotomy in human primary molars. METHODS: A total of 152 children with 252 primary molars met selection criteria. Of those, 119 and 133 teeth were randomly assigned to the GMTA and DFC groups, respectively. Periapical radiographs, taken pre- and/or postoperatively and at each 6-month follow-up, were digitized and evaluated by three blinded and calibrated examiners. RESULTS: Over a 42-month period, a total of 865 clinical and radiographic evaluations were conducted. There was no significant difference in clinical success, with the cumulative proportion of GMTA-treated teeth surviving at 0.98 vs DFC-treated teeth at 0.95 (P>.05). Radiographic success, however, was significantly greater for GMTA vs DFC, with the cumulative proportion of GMTA-treated teeth surviving at 0.90 vs DFC-treated teeth at 0.47 (P<.001). Overall, DFC-treated teeth were 5.1 times more likely to fail than GMTA-treated teeth. Radiographic pathologies were observed more frequently in the DFC-treated teeth (P<.05). CONCLUSION: Gray mineral trioxide aggregate can be considered an acceptable replacement for diluted formocresol when used as a medicament for primary molar pulpotomies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]